If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Stranger)   Washington state has filed a lawsuit against the florist who refused to do the flowers for a gay wedding due to her "relationship with Jesus". WWJD, indeed?   (slog.thestranger.com) divider line 273
    More: Followup, public accommodations, flower shops, Human Rights Commission, legal defense, discrimination law, federal courts  
•       •       •

4409 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Apr 2013 at 11:28 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



273 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-10 01:11:26 AM
Freaking out and flipping tables is a valid response.
 
2013-04-10 01:17:57 AM
iamrex... Paging iamrex to the white courtesy phone...

Why is anyone surprised by this?  It's always been this way for us queers - if you want flowers, wedding cake, whatever - you go to a gay-owned business.  To avoid this very thing.

/Relatioship with a human o the same gender = Bad
//Relationship with 2,000-year-old invisible zombie = A-OK
 
2013-04-10 01:18:15 AM
This case is a refreshing change from the usual drill.  Normally, a gay couple would claim discrimination and the florist would claim religious freedom.  But here, the AG is claiming consumer harm and the florist is claiming free speech.
 
2013-04-10 01:18:28 AM
Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?
 
2013-04-10 01:20:47 AM

BarkingUnicorn: This case is a refreshing change from the usual drill.  Normally, a gay couple would claim discrimination and the florist would claim religious freedom.  But here, the AG is claiming consumer harm and the florist is claiming free speech.


Artistic expression, even.
 
2013-04-10 01:21:16 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: iamrex... Paging iamrex to the white courtesy phone...


I love showing up and seeing that my work is already done.

*Applause*
 
2013-04-10 01:21:24 AM

Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?


Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.
 
2013-04-10 01:36:19 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.


Uh, okay. Blacks or Jews aren't special. Just go spend your money somewhere else. Easy. Again, why would anyone give a shiat?
 
2013-04-10 01:43:46 AM

Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.

Uh, okay. Blacks or Jews aren't special. Just go spend your money somewhere else. Easy. Again, why would anyone give a shiat?


So you would be cool with a business owner refusing to serve someone because they were black?  Really?   Okay, now I know for sure you're trolling.  Got me.
 
2013-04-10 01:58:12 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.

Uh, okay. Blacks or Jews aren't special. Just go spend your money somewhere else. Easy. Again, why would anyone give a shiat?

So you would be cool with a business owner refusing to serve someone because they were black?  Really?   Okay, now I know for sure you're trolling.  Got me.


No, of course I'm not trolling. If some shopkeeper is being an asshat, just take your money somewhere else.
 
2013-04-10 02:00:51 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: iamrex... Paging iamrex to the white courtesy phone...

Why is anyone surprised by this?  It's always been this way for us queers - if you want flowers, wedding cake, whatever - you go to a gay-owned business.  To avoid this very thing.

/Relatioship with a human o the same gender = Bad
//Relationship with 2,000-year-old invisible zombie = A-OK


You come to us gays for your wedding needs if you don't want your wedding to look like it was done by Sears and Dollar General.
 
2013-04-10 02:41:32 AM
Benevolent, just so we're clear love, I understand your point and agree. I just don't have the ability to make someone not be an asshole if they've decided they're going to be. no one does. The only thing I can do is take my business somewhere else, go try to continue having a good day and maybe get laid. Then a sammich or something.
 
2013-04-10 03:06:02 AM
"Although gay 'marriage' may be legal in Washington for the time being, the concept offends the conscious [sic] of Ms. Stutzman

Why does it not surprise me that the lawyers representing her either do not know the difference between conscience and conscious or cannot effectively proofread a document that will be submitted to a court. My guess is both.
 
2013-04-10 06:23:22 AM
0.tqn.com
 
2013-04-10 07:22:20 AM
If she wants to put herself out of business by sticking to her Christian beliefs, that's her choice. I'm sure her gay-friendly competition is cool with it too...so what's the state doing getting involved, besides pandering?
 
2013-04-10 09:37:54 AM

Spad31: Benevolent, just so we're clear love, I understand your point and agree. I just don't have the ability to make someone not be an asshole if they've decided they're going to be. no one does. The only thing I can do is take my business somewhere else, go try to continue having a good day and maybe get laid. Then a sammich or something.


You can't stop them, true, and neither can I.  But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off.  The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that.  You're being an asshole.  Quit it."
 
2013-04-10 10:17:01 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Benevolent, just so we're clear love, I understand your point and agree. I just don't have the ability to make someone not be an asshole if they've decided they're going to be. no one does. The only thing I can do is take my business somewhere else, go try to continue having a good day and maybe get laid. Then a sammich or something.

You can't stop them, true, and neither can I.  But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off.  The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that.  You're being an asshole.  Quit it."


I'm glad you read and responded. Waited all day for it. ;)  I truly wasn't trolling you, you know. You've been here long enough that you're noticed and appreciated.

I'm still not convinced the AG has any ground to tell anyone what sort of customers they want to do business with. If some ass doesn't like a particular person, they don't have to do business with them. The customer isn't obligated in any way to give said ass money. They (the asshole) don't have to "quit it" because someone got their feelings hurt. Yes, that is a slippery slope...where do you draw the line? I'm of the mind we have too many folks worrying about too many things as it is and not enough just actual responsibility. But, I'm old and cranky, so there you go. Have a great day!
 
2013-04-10 10:37:29 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off. The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that. You're being an asshole. Quit it."


The People are able to see it as they choose without the state doing it for them. We don't have a situation here where gay couples are charged $2000 but straight couples get to pay $600 for the same flowers, and state would have a logical reason to step in. There are plenty of competing florists who would be delighted to take the gay couple's business. So what we have is a florist who's lost at the very least an employee two customers, and no doubt plenty more since she's earned herself a shiatload of bad press. Looks like the problem will solve itself without the state needing to ride to the rescue.

One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?
 
2013-04-10 11:03:24 AM

Gulper Eel: One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?


I feel as though this is one of those pick your battles wisely situations.  Denying essential services to anyone based on personal prejudice is and should be against the law and enforced by the State, flowers don't fall into that category.  Basically, this gives every Bible Thumping Bigot reason to point their finger and shout "SEE!  WE'RE BEING OPPRESSED BY THE GAYS!" with spittle flecked lips.  Not every injustice needs to be rectified by the law, sometimes it can be dealt with by going on Yelp and writing:  "This florist refused to serve us because of our sexual orientation, if you support equal rights, find another florist."
 
2013-04-10 11:18:20 AM
Well, how about this then: Since the Religious Right consider homosexuality to be a mental illness which can be cured, I think this would fall under the ADA, discriminating against someone with a disability.
 
2013-04-10 11:21:58 AM

Spad31: I'm still not convinced the AG has any ground to tell anyone what sort of customers they want to do business with. If some ass doesn't like a particular person, they don't have to do business with them. The customer isn't obligated in any way to give said ass money. They (the asshole) don't have to "quit it" because someone got their feelings hurt. Yes, that is a slippery slope...where do you draw the line? I'm of the mind we have too many folks worrying about too many things as it is and not enough just actual responsibility. But, I'm old and cranky, so there you go. Have a great day!


Thanks for your kind words. :)

As a gay person, I see it more as a "sitting at the whites only lunch counter" thing, but that's probably because I've been the recipient of legalized anti-gay harassment for a very long time.   Any business person has a right to deny service, but when you deny service because someone is part of a class of persons that the law (passed by The People) says, "Knock off treating these people differently", then we have a problem.

Gulper Eel: One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?


If I did tell them to piss up a rope because they're KoC, and there was a law specifically saying I can't deny them service for being KoC, then I would expect to be sued and have a civil rights violation slapped on me for good measure.  If, however, I denied them service for asking me to print legally-defined hate speech, I'm protected.  When I deny them because I don't like their opinion, that's when the waters get muddy.

Look at it this way:  The gay couple came to her to do flowers.  They were denied because they're gay, not because the florist didn't like their colors or choice of plant species.  There's a law that says you can't do that - nor can she deny someone because they're Freewill Four-Square Gospel Baptist and she's Freewill Four-Square Primitive Baptist, or because they're a Seekrit Ae-rabb Mooslim, or because they're black.

It may seem a subtle difference, but for people like me who have been denied service time and again for just being who we are, and treated as third-class humans (or not EVEN human) by people around us and by the law, for a long time, it's a real difference.
 
2013-04-10 11:30:45 AM

Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.

Uh, okay. Blacks or Jews aren't special. Just go spend your money somewhere else. Easy. Again, why would anyone give a shiat?


0/10
 
2013-04-10 11:35:07 AM

Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Benevolent, just so we're clear love, I understand your point and agree. I just don't have the ability to make someone not be an asshole if they've decided they're going to be. no one does. The only thing I can do is take my business somewhere else, go try to continue having a good day and maybe get laid. Then a sammich or something.

You can't stop them, true, and neither can I.  But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off.  The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that.  You're being an asshole.  Quit it."

I'm glad you read and responded. Waited all day for it. ;)  I truly wasn't trolling you, you know. You've been here long enough that you're noticed and appreciated.

I'm still not convinced the AG has any ground to tell anyone what sort of customers they want to do business with. If some ass doesn't like a particular person, they don't have to do business with them. The customer isn't obligated in any way to give said ass money. They (the asshole) don't have to "quit it" because someone got their feelings hurt. Yes, that is a slippery slope...where do you draw the line? I'm of the mind we have too many folks worrying about too many things as it is and not enough just actual responsibility. But, I'm old and cranky, so there you go. Have a great day!


Except for the fact that occurs when you begin discriminating against those customers not simply because you want to be an asshole, but because you just don't like their skin color, or what god they pray to, or because they like cock.

The first two are against the Civil Rights act of 1966 unless it is a private club that does not do any interstate commerce. The last one is against the Civil Rights Acts of many states.
 
2013-04-10 11:35:07 AM
because she believed as a Christian "that marriage is between a man and a woman."

Another "christian" conservative that hasn't read the farking Bible.
 
2013-04-10 11:35:53 AM

Gulper Eel: If she wants to put herself out of business by sticking to her Christian beliefs, that's her choice. I'm sure her gay-friendly competition is cool with it too...so what's the state doing getting involved, besides pandering?


I'm wondering that as well.  I'm pretty sure there's no US constitutional right to purchase flowers.  Maybe it's different in Washington state.

If the customer had ordered a deathshead bouquet for his metal themed wedding and the florist found it unacceptable would it be OK to sue over that one as well?
 
2013-04-10 11:35:57 AM
Stutzman claimed that "discrimination is not the issue," but rather that she is entitled to exercise her religious conscience and thatarranging flowers is an act of personal expression, and as such, any restriction on how and where she sells flowers arrangements infringes on her First Amendment right to free speech.

Great, lady. Arrange flowers at home, on your own time. Knock yourself out. Give the arrangements away, even. But if you're going to open a storefront, advertise, and charge for the arrangements, then you have to accommodate everyone willing to pay.
 
2013-04-10 11:36:45 AM
Why would you want to give your business, your money, to someone that hates you? I'd rather know someone hates me so I can take my business elsewhere. And even if I'm not part of the group being denied service, I'd rather know the owner is a complete ahole, so I don't give them my money in protest.
 
2013-04-10 11:37:01 AM

Source4leko: Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.

Uh, okay. Blacks or Jews aren't special. Just go spend your money somewhere else. Easy. Again, why would anyone give a shiat?

0/10


In situations like this it is still odd to me that when a private company discriminates against a costumer why does it become a legal thing in a so called capitalist economy, why not publicly shame them, take your business elsewhere and let everyone know their policies and try to make change through hitting them in the market, especially in this day in age with the internet just let everyone know
 
2013-04-10 11:37:06 AM
I'm with the florist on this.

Wedding flowers are a big thing. It's not like the happy couple goes into Sears and walks out with a lawn mower. They become clients of the florist, who has to go to the location and work closely with them. Privately owned businesses should be able to choose who they take on as clients, for whatever reason. And yes, that means they should be free to be homophobic or racist or whatever. Let the market take care of them after.
 
2013-04-10 11:37:27 AM

Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.

Uh, okay. Blacks or Jews aren't special. Just go spend your money somewhere else. Easy. Again, why would anyone give a shiat?


In an ideal world, I'd be right in the same boat with you. Unfortunately, it's not an ideal world and this may not be an issue the invisible hand can just solve on its own. America has entirely too many "No Irish Need Apply" signs and whites-only diners in its history---communities full of them, in fact---for me to be comfortable with the otherwise-quite-excellent "Take your business elsewhere" solution.

Granted, if they  could take their business elsewhere (and "elsewhere" isn't "the next county over"), it may not be worth the government's money and time to force this issue. But if the AG is trying to break a bad systemic pattern, then more power to him.
 
2013-04-10 11:38:01 AM
The Bible clearly states that they should be executed by stoning. It doesn't say anything at all about whether they should have flowers at their weddings.
 
2013-04-10 11:38:43 AM

number8: Why would you want to give your business, your money, to someone that hates you? I'd rather know someone hates me so I can take my business elsewhere. And even if I'm not part of the group being denied service, I'd rather know the owner is a complete ahole, so I don't give them my money in protest.


I don't know about you, but when I walk into a store, my first question generally isn't what the proprietor's religious views are. I have to admit, though, that if their advertising or storefront includes an icthys symbol, I might be less inclined to do business there.
 
2013-04-10 11:39:05 AM
Interesting that Christianity is so full of the people who killed Jesus: scribes and pharisees.
 
2013-04-10 11:40:09 AM

WillofJ2: In situations like this it is still odd to me that when a private company discriminates against a costumer why does it become a legal thing in a so called capitalist economy, why not publicly shame them, take your business elsewhere and let everyone know their policies and try to make change through hitting them in the market, especially in this day in age with the internet just let everyone know


Maybe, but costume shops are few and far between.
 
2013-04-10 11:40:19 AM
I'm the libbiest lib that ever libbed, but the AG is wrong.
 
2013-04-10 11:41:23 AM

number8: Why would you want to give your business, your money, to someone that hates you? I'd rather know someone hates me so I can take my business elsewhere. And even if I'm not part of the group being denied service, I'd rather know the owner is a complete ahole, so I don't give them my money in protest.


What if you live in a small community, and all two florists in town have a problem with gays, blacks, jews, whatever?
 
2013-04-10 11:41:42 AM
Stutzman claimed that "discrimination is not the issue," but rather that she is entitled to exercise her religious conscience and that arranging flowers is an act of personal expression, and as such, any restriction on how and where she sells flowers arrangements infringes on her First Amendment right to free speech.

Then go ahead and do your personal expression on your own time; but while you are operating a business with a business license in a State that says you cannot discriminate against consumers for race/sex/orientation then you must abide by those laws. Or the State has every right to simply sue you to get it through your thick skull that your first amendment right does not trump another's first amendment right. Or they could very well take your license away from you.
 
2013-04-10 11:41:49 AM
She's screwed.

It's amazing how many people wear their bigotry on their sleeves.

She could have just stated "I'm booked, sorry", and no one would be the wiser.  But instead, she made her real objections known.

At least it's out there now, rather than seething beneath the surface.
 
2013-04-10 11:42:36 AM
Yeah, like no one saw this coming.

Business owner: I reserve the right to not do business with someone.
Lawyers: Well, yeah...
Business owner: ...including gays...
Lawyers: Get the pitchforks...

Would the AG sue a Muslim shop owner who refused to do business with someone wearing an "I LOVE BACON" shirt, or would the pork-eater be labelled as "insensitive" for having the NERVE to set foot in the Muslim shop?
 
2013-04-10 11:43:31 AM

number8: Why would you want to give your business, your money, to someone that hates you? I'd rather know someone hates me so I can take my business elsewhere. And even if I'm not part of the group being denied service, I'd rather know the owner is a complete ahole, so I don't give them my money in protest.


Nobody's really suggesting that the florist should be forced to provide flowers for gay weddings against her will.  They're suggesting that she should be sued for the civil rights abuses her bigotry pushes her into, and that such lawsuits will hopefully drive her out of business completely.

I don't understand this idea that "the market" should fix it.  It seems like a backwards attempt to justify bigotry by hoping that there's enough bigots out there to keep these businesses afloat.
 
2013-04-10 11:43:51 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: I'm still not convinced the AG has any ground to tell anyone what sort of customers they want to do business with. If some ass doesn't like a particular person, they don't have to do business with them. The customer isn't obligated in any way to give said ass money. They (the asshole) don't have to "quit it" because someone got their feelings hurt. Yes, that is a slippery slope...where do you draw the line? I'm of the mind we have too many folks worrying about too many things as it is and not enough just actual responsibility. But, I'm old and cranky, so there you go. Have a great day!

Thanks for your kind words. :)

As a gay person, I see it more as a "sitting at the whites only lunch counter" thing, but that's probably because I've been the recipient of legalized anti-gay harassment for a very long time.   Any business person has a right to deny service, but when you deny service because someone is part of a class of persons that the law (passed by The People) says, "Knock off treating these people differently", then we have a problem.

Gulper Eel: One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?

If I did tell them to piss up a rope because they're KoC, and there was a law specifically saying I can't deny them service for being KoC, then I would expect to be sued and have a civil rights violation slapped on me for good measure.  If, however, I denied them service for asking me to print legally-defined hate speech, I'm protected.  When I deny them because I don't like their opinion, that's when the waters get muddy.

Look at it this way:  The gay couple came to her to do flowers.  They wer ...


Love, you can sit at my counter any day. I cook well and have a passion for it, but I don't know squat about floral stuff. You'll have to find some gay guy for the accoutrements!
 
2013-04-10 11:44:13 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: if you want flowers, wedding cake, whatever - you go to a gay-owned business


Wait, let me get this right: you mean to tell me there are straight florists?
 
2013-04-10 11:44:36 AM

Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?


Well, you're quite wrong on the facts, Counselor.

You may want to brush up on the concept of "Places of Public Accomodation".

Unless you're going to get all hair-splitty and say you meant "Not wanting to do business with, but does anyway, because it's the law".
 
2013-04-10 11:45:05 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Why is anyone surprised by this? It's always been this way for us queers - if you want flowers, wedding cake, whatever - you go to a gay-owned business. To avoid this very thing.


So you're advocating for free market solutions?

Good to see.
 
2013-04-10 11:46:02 AM

IC Stars: number8: Why would you want to give your business, your money, to someone that hates you? I'd rather know someone hates me so I can take my business elsewhere. And even if I'm not part of the group being denied service, I'd rather know the owner is a complete ahole, so I don't give them my money in protest.

What if you live in a small community, and all two florists in town have a problem with gays, blacks, jews, whatever?


What if you live in a town with no florists?  Can you force someone to be a florist?
If it were a matter of just selling the flowers, I would say the business is considered a semi-public business and they should not discriminate on who they sell the flowers to.
However, we're talking about a contract job, or a pseudo-contract job, and you shouldn't force someone to enter a contract.
 
2013-04-10 11:47:16 AM

Gulper Eel: I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?


Yes.

Seriously, you can ask that question, knowing the terminology, and not know the answer already?
 
2013-04-10 11:48:08 AM

BarkingUnicorn: This case is a refreshing change from the usual drill.  Normally, a gay couple would claim discrimination and the florist would claim religious freedom.  But here, the AG is claiming consumer harm and the florist is claiming free speech.


Orientation is a protected class in Washington, florist is a "place of public accommodation", florist admits to discrimination. Suit seems like a slam dunk.
 
2013-04-10 11:49:16 AM

Voiceofreason01: BarkingUnicorn: This case is a refreshing change from the usual drill.  Normally, a gay couple would claim discrimination and the florist would claim religious freedom.  But here, the AG is claiming consumer harm and the florist is claiming free speech.

Orientation is a protected class in Washington, florist is a "place of public accommodation", florist admits to discrimination. Suit seems like a slam dunk.


Hence the constitutional claim, I suppose. Trumps state and federal laws.
 
2013-04-10 11:51:50 AM

Mr. Eugenides: I'm wondering that as well.  I'm pretty sure there's no US constitutional right to purchase flowers.


The Federal Civil Rights Act has been upheld as constitutional and guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

A florist is considered a "place of public accommodation" because it sells flowers to the general public. So while you don't have a constitutional right to purchase flowers, you have a right to not be denied flowers (that are otherwise available to be sold to the general public) for any of the reasons listed above. Interestingly, that doesn't expressly include gender or sexuality.

Not saying I necessarily agree or disagree with the law. Just reporting how I understand it to work.
 
2013-04-10 11:52:05 AM

Spad31: Benevolent, just so we're clear love, I understand your point and agree. I just don't have the ability to make someone not be an asshole if they've decided they're going to be. no one does. The only thing I can do is take my business somewhere else, go try to continue having a good day and maybe get laid. Then a sammich or something.


Here is the catch.

When it's as I said, they just keep it their bigotry hidden, the average consumer doesn't know they are dealing with an asshole.

In this case there are also people that are straight, but don't want to patronize businesses that have assholes discriminating against their friends (gay, black, Jews, Muslims). If this owner had just kept quiet, she'd maintain business from the straight customers that don't want to patronize bigots.

Bigot's don't usually put up signs anymore announcing they are assholes.

That kinda went out of practice in the last 50 years.

www.myweku.com

2.bp.blogspot.com

2.bp.blogspot.com

archive.adl.org

//Whoops, that last one IS still in use.
 
Displayed 50 of 273 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report